NotesFAQContact Us
Collection
Advanced
Search Tips
ERIC Number: ED473845
Record Type: Non-Journal
Publication Date: 2003-Feb
Pages: 12
Abstractor: N/A
Reference Count: N/A
ISBN: N/A
ISSN: N/A
Child Care Subsidy Policies and Practices: Implications for Child Care Providers. New Federalism: Issues and Options for States, Series A. Assessing the New Federalism: An Urban Institute Program To Assess Changing Social Policies.
Adams, Gina; Snyder, Kathleen; Tout, Kathryn
This brief summarizes the report "Essential but Often Ignored: Child Care Providers in the Subsidy System," examining child care subsidy policies and practices shaping experiences of providers serving subsidized children, particularly those affecting providers' payments and their overall experience with the subsidy system. Research on the voucher subsidy system was based on interviews with state and local child care administrators and key experts, and focus groups with caseworkers, parents, and providers in the subsidy system in 17 sites in 12 states. The study found that how much providers are paid is critical for them and was affected by several issues, including policies affecting the maximum amount that state subsidy agencies paid. A challenging issue for states was how to deal with providers whose rates exceeded the maximum payment rate. Policies and practices serving to undercut whether providers received from the state the full rate they were due included issues related to absent days, reimbursement for other fees, part-time subsidies, and reimbursement for full period of service. Although provider-reported difficulties in collecting fees from parents are not unique to subsidized care, such difficulties could affect what providers receive. Factors influencing how providers experienced the subsidy system included policies/practices affecting the payment process (obtaining payment authorization, onerous paperwork requirements, and timing and reliability of payments), the ease of interacting with the subsidy agency (number of programs/agencies, staffing responsibilities within the agency, interactions with caseworkers, and the extent to which providers were viewed as partners. The brief includes a list of strategies to address providers' needs and compares the financial bottom line of a hypothetical provider under three subsidy scenarios. (KB)
Urban Institute, 2100 M Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20037. Tel: 202-261-5687; Fax: 202-429-0687; e-mail: paffairs@ui.urban.org; Web site: http://www.urban.org. For full text: http://www.urban.org/UploadedPDF/310614_A57.pdf.
Publication Type: Reports - Evaluative
Education Level: N/A
Audience: N/A
Language: English
Sponsor: John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, Chicago, IL.; David and Lucile Packard Foundation, Los Altos, CA.; Annie E. Casey Foundation, Baltimore, MD.; Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, Princeton, NJ.; Kellogg Foundation, Battle Creek, MI.; Ford Foundation, New York, NY.
Authoring Institution: Urban Inst., Washington, DC.